Rohde is a very interesting scientist to follow on Twitter and always has some interesting perspective on climate-related discussions. I asked him why he decided to conduct this ad-hoc analysis. He told me in a message:

Whether it is @AOC or @realDonaldTrump, we all know that Twitter is an increasingly powerful method of political communication, but do politicians also use Twitter to learn about important issues? I was curious if Members of Congress (or their staffs) were using Twitter as a way of listening directly to the messages and warnings that climate scientists have been sharing.

Every single member of Congress has at least one Twitter account. Many have more than one (e.g. government account, "personal" account, campaign account, etc.)....For simplicity, I only looked at one account per member of Congress (hopefully the one with the most followers)....This gives 538 Congressional Twitter accounts to compare with the @KHayhoe's list of scientists.

Here is a synthesis of his main findings along with hyperlinks to the Tweets naming the scientists:

Of course, Members of Congress have access to many excellent sources of information, and if they aren't listening to climate scientists on Twitter, then hopefully they are still learning about climate change in other ways as they go about their important work.

Overall, I am not sure what can be drawn from Rohde's analysis, but I did find it fascinating. One conclusion that I might draw is that some members of Congress may not see Twitter as their "go to" source for information on climate science. As such, we probably should be careful about judging their perspectives on climate change based on whether they follow climate scientists or not. However, Rohde's analysis does provide an opportunity for members of Congress (or their staffers) to gain access to credible climate scientists easily. Hayhoe's list is a good start.

Marshall Shepherd and Admiral David Titley briefing National Academies and media on extreme weather-climate linkages in 2016

Berkeley Earth was conceived by Richard and Elizabeth Muller in early 2010 when they found merit in some of the concerns of skeptics. They organized a group of scientists to reanalyze the Earth’s surface temperature record, and published their initial findings in 2012. Berkeley Earth became an independent non-profit 501(c)(3) in February 2013.

While the organization began out of skeptical origins, their analysis and scientists have become credible and compelling voices for science and action related to climate change. Their website goes on to say, "We believe that now it is our responsibility to communicate our findings, in particular with prominent stakeholders familiar with the reasons for global warming skepticism that Berkeley Earth addressed." I often cite this organization as an example of how science should work rather than being anchored down in the weight of ideology and bias.